It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Forget the F-22 upgrade the F-15

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 01:47 AM
link   
True however my point is that the age of the design is insignificant if it can still be upgraded. I heard somewhere that some people in the USAF want the F-15 to be in front-line service until 2020




posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by danwild6
True however my point is that the age of the design is insignificant if it can still be upgraded. I heard somewhere that some people in the USAF want the F-15 to be in front-line service until 2020


It may be but not in an air superiority role. That day for it has passed or will soon be. Nobody is arguing that its time to send it to the boneyard (At least I am not) however, to think that a large number of upgrades 9albiet some really good ones) will return it to its air dominance role.

With the AESA and an improved long range AAM, it can still be a potent force and will still have a cruise missile defence role thrown in to boot.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 01:55 AM
link   
And again, you can only upgrade so far before others overtake you and pass you. The F-15 was and still is a great fighter, but there are others out there that are AT LEAST as good and a few that are BETTER than the F-15. Even if we upgrade it further. There are only so many upgrades you can do. You're not going to be able to upgrade manuverability much further in it, you can't upgrade the weapons on it except as more efficient and longer range missiles come online. Yeah you can get more speed out of it, but speed isn't everything. Yes they want it in service until 2020, but look how long it's going to take the F-22 and F-35s to come online. The first F-22 squadron just went active in November or December of last year. ONE SQUADRON. The F-35 will be another few years before they're even close to being in service. By the time the F-15 is retired they'll be all ANG units.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Yeah I guess I have to face the facts. But is the F-22 the answer to the air-superiority role. I mean like what was posted before will their be enough F-22's to do the job. Last December the Air Force said now they were only going to order around 180 aircraft. Is that enough especially when the USAF is mandated to be able to fight 2 campaigns almost simultaneously.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Well, one of them was able to bring down 5 F-15s in an exercise, so theoretically 180 will be enough to cover a LIMITED two front war. We have enough second line planes to back them up too.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 02:51 AM
link   
Like CH intimated our best bet would be to buy a positive load of UCAV's but the pilot mafia won't allow this currently.... give it a decade though and they will change their minds. I say this because israel was in on the battlefield laser and was only kicked at the final stages, when the chinese israelis and iranians all show the abillity to kill even an f-22 at the horizon the pilots will change their tune. until then resign yourselves to paying 200 million plus for inherently obsolete airframes.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
As much as I'm impressed by the Eagle, and as much as the threats out there have changed, we NEED a program like the Raptor. Even if they upgraded the Eagle instead of going with the Raptor, it's STILL just an Eagle. There is only so much upgrading you can do before someone catches up and passes you. That's happening with the Eagle. Even if they upgraded it, sooner or later it's gonna get passed up, and as long as it takes to get a new design in the air anymore (Love live Kelley Johnson), if we didn't have something in the works already, it would be 20 more years of the Eagle, and by that point there would be new planes (like the Typhoon) flying circles around it.


I remembered something Kelly Johnson said wehn building the SR-71:

"It makes no sense to just take this one or two steps ahead, because we'd be buying only couple of years before the Russians would be able to nail us again. No, I want us to come up with an airplane that can rule the skies for a decade or more."

That is the vision behind the F-22...

[edit on 7-2-2006 by carcharodon]



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   
That's why he was such a genius. Everyone else was saying "This is what they have, we need to be a little better." and then by the time it came out they had parity. He designed, built and flew in half the time of just about everyone else, and UNHEARD OF times now.The U-2 was 18 months from paper to flight, and the SR-71 was IIRC three years. And that was only because no one had worked with titanium in such a big capacity.

BTW, that should have been LONG live Kelley Johnson. I was tired when I wrote that and didn't notice it til just a few minutes ago.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Kelly Johnson was a god of aviation. But I wonder if were keeping true to his vision with the F-22. I mean it first flew in the early 1990's and is only now reaching squadron service. Thats alot of time in between for the russian and chinese to develop counter-measures.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   
The IDEA of the F-22 is what he wanted, the IMPLEMENTATION isn't. Johnson had a way of saying "This is what we have, this is what you need. Wanna buy it?" and the miilitary would go "OOOOOO I want one of them, and one of them."



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   
The thing is that Russia is broke. They don't have the money to develop a new fighter jet, plus they have been lagging since the 80's... They have a lot to catch up, so in a way there is no rush. Still the F-22 is a least one generation ahead of everything else. Its way more advanced than the Typhoon and the Rafale and the Russian planes well they are old planes pimped up. They are the aircraft version of Pimp My Ride...


I think we'll see Kelly Johnson style when Russia and China decide to work together... If they ever do


[edit on 7-2-2006 by carcharodon]



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   
I believe if we see a fifth generation Russian fighter become ready anytime in the next decade, it will probrably be from Sukhoi. Thier reinvestment of earnings from the SU-35 sales to China indicate they understand the true value of capitalism, (probrably better than a lot of hand to mouth US companies), and would be the only ones with the money and the aviation skills to put to the task.

Of course, it's also probable they'd save a lot of money by making it about 60% Flankerjet. (Landing gear, engines, avionics...)



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   
i agree if anyone is tasked with building russia's 5th generation fighter it will most likely be Sukhoi. I think their the better of the resign design bureau anyways their craft are far more innovative and effective than MIG aircraft.



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by carcharodon

I remembered something Kelly Johnson said wehn building the SR-71:

"It makes no sense to just take this one or two steps ahead, because we'd be buying only couple of years before the Russians would be able to nail us again. No, I want us to come up with an airplane that can rule the skies for a decade or more."

That is the vision behind the F-22...




The concept of using such aircraft for air-superiority is obsolete and it should have been pretty obvious in the 90's.

It's onboard computers are already obsolete compared to what you can get at Best Buy.

The only real advantage that it has over the F-15 and F-14 is perhaps some degree of sub-sonic stealth but even that is only potentially effective against weak enemies who we have defeated easily with the equipment we have already.



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by orca71

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Upgrading the engines wont cost nearly as much as buying a new F-15, let alone buying a raptor. We do not need a "air-superiority" fighter that cannot be properly deployed due to its high cost and small number. We need a low-cost aircraft with exceptional systems. The F-15 and F-16 satisfy this need at the moment because we already have them. About the only thing the F-22 can claim to be much better than is in stealth and super-sonic fuel-economy yet in super-sonic flight, neither stealth nor economy are possible. In other words, in a super-sonic mission, the F-22 doesnt offer much advantage over an the F-15 in a one-to-one comparison, and on the whole offers a fraction of the capability relative to an F-15 with upgraded systems.


You don't seem to understand what I said.

To upgrade the whole F-15 fleet with new engines, electronics, and further flight life for the airframe would cost 90% of simply buying new Raptors. Basically, to medernize the F-15 to a competative level with future foes will cost 90 cents on the dollar.

So, it would be plain STUPID to do this. For only 10% etra, you get a FAR more capable aircraft.

The numerical aspect will be filled by a fleet of F-35's and a small left over fleet of F-15's, as well as future systems.



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by orca71
The concept of using such aircraft for air-superiority is obsolete and it should have been pretty obvious in the 90's.

It's onboard computers are already obsolete compared to what you can get at Best Buy.

The only real advantage that it has over the F-15 and F-14 is perhaps some degree of sub-sonic stealth but even that is only potentially effective against weak enemies who we have defeated easily with the equipment we have already.


Everything you said is factually wrong.

Computers obsolete compared to what you can get at best buy? Try again. Think more along the lines of supercomputers. Cray supercomputers. TWO OF THEM.

Then you talk about it's only real advantage being "some degree of subsonic stealth." You couldn't be more wrong. The Raptor can fly in supercruise and retain the same level of stealth it had, had it ben flying sub-sonically.

And then you say that this stealth is only effective against weak enemies.

Do you consider the USAF weak? Because the Raptor has proven to be virtually invisable to current F-15 radar. In fact, in actual tests the Raptor did not even apear on radar to an F-15 untill it flew DIRECTLY OVER the F-15.

This is of course to say nothing of the extreme avionics advantage it has over any aircraft in existance, giving it situational awareness to a near dominant level.

I suggest you do a bit of research on this subject before you comment any further. There is some great reading in the Aircraft forum.



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Besides the computers you have at home somehow differ from the ones used at critical applications. You see you have this PC that has irregular performance and is prone to fail at any given time without warning.

Military computers have to be tested for 100% reliability, that means they cannot fail.
They are custom made and hardly share parts with common PC's. Usually they are custom processors made to perform critical tasks. Making a processor is very expensive and complicated and is one of the reasons american planes have so much better avionics than the rest, they can ask some of theri companis to desing and fabricate a processor. Texas instruments made the Raptor's.

Raptor Avionics



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 09:23 AM
link   
The computing systems in modern combat systems are more closely related to comercial mainframes than desktop PCs. Typicly they involve a network of processors, each assigned to certain specific functions.



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man

Originally posted by orca71

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Upgrading the engines wont cost nearly as much as buying a new F-15, let alone buying a raptor. We do not need a "air-superiority" fighter that cannot be properly deployed due to its high cost and small number. We need a low-cost aircraft with exceptional systems. The F-15 and F-16 satisfy this need at the moment because we already have them. About the only thing the F-22 can claim to be much better than is in stealth and super-sonic fuel-economy yet in super-sonic flight, neither stealth nor economy are possible. In other words, in a super-sonic mission, the F-22 doesnt offer much advantage over an the F-15 in a one-to-one comparison, and on the whole offers a fraction of the capability relative to an F-15 with upgraded systems.


You don't seem to understand what I said.

To upgrade the whole F-15 fleet with new engines, electronics, and further flight life for the airframe would cost 90% of simply buying new Raptors. Basically, to medernize the F-15 to a competative level with future foes will cost 90 cents on the dollar.

So, it would be plain STUPID to do this. For only 10% etra, you get a FAR more capable aircraft.

The numerical aspect will be filled by a fleet of F-35's and a small left over fleet of F-15's, as well as future systems.


No, for a minimum of 10% more you get a handful of aircraft with no real capability advantage on a one-to-one comparison and far less capability at the strategic level.



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man

Originally posted by orca71
The concept of using such aircraft for air-superiority is obsolete and it should have been pretty obvious in the 90's.

It's onboard computers are already obsolete compared to what you can get at Best Buy.

The only real advantage that it has over the F-15 and F-14 is perhaps some degree of sub-sonic stealth but even that is only potentially effective against weak enemies who we have defeated easily with the equipment we have already.


Everything you said is factually wrong.

Computers obsolete compared to what you can get at best buy? Try again. Think more along the lines of supercomputers. Cray supercomputers. TWO OF THEM.

Then you talk about it's only real advantage being "some degree of subsonic stealth." You couldn't be more wrong. The Raptor can fly in supercruise and retain the same level of stealth it had, had it ben flying sub-sonically.

And then you say that this stealth is only effective against weak enemies.

Do you consider the USAF weak? Because the Raptor has proven to be virtually invisable to current F-15 radar. In fact, in actual tests the Raptor did not even apear on radar to an F-15 untill it flew DIRECTLY OVER the F-15.

This is of course to say nothing of the extreme avionics advantage it has over any aircraft in existance, giving it situational awareness to a near dominant level.

I suggest you do a bit of research on this subject before you comment any further. There is some great reading in the Aircraft forum.


Im sorry you bought into that ridiculous sales job with talk of cray computers and defeating 5 F15s.

Not only are tests meaningless unless they are carried out by independent agencies but the fact is they released this "info" to the public because they are trying to sell the idea of the F-22.

As for the Cray computers, you do realize they are talking about 20 year old cray computers right? Its another piece of marketing that only fools those who dont understand technology.

How about you do a bit of research. Find and compare the following for the F22's CIP and an Intel P4.

Instructions per second
Gigaflops

If youre not too embarrassed to post what you find we'll talk.

[edit on 9-2-2006 by orca71]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join